Site Navigation

Site Mobile Navigation

Watershed: Teaching About Gun Control After Newtown

Mourners at a makeshift memorial to the victims of the shootings in Newtown, Conn. The town is not an obvious arena for the nation’s debate over gun control. Go to related article »Credit Marcus Yam for The New York Times

Civics

Overview | What should happen in response to the shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School? How should the nation try to prevent similar tragedies from occurring in the future? In this lesson, students will explore the political process that was set in motion by the Dec. 14 school attack that killed 20 children and 6 staff members. They will research the issues and history behind gun control in the United States and try to predict what sort of bill might eventually emerge from Congress.

Materials | Computers for individual students or groups to read articles from The New York Times online, or copies of articles as needed.

Warm-Up | Tell students: By now you have all heard about the school shootings in Newtown, Conn. Twenty-eight people, including 20 children, were killed by a man carrying four of his mother’s guns. And President Obama said he was determined to introduce new laws to make sure this cannot happen again. But what exactly does that mean? What changes to the law could prevent such a terrible thing from happening? Any ideas?

Write student brainstorming ideas on the board under the heading “possible laws.” Do you think this will be easy, or are there reasons this might be either challenging or a bad idea? Write brainstorming ideas under the heading “possible obstacles.”

Over the next few days we are going to look at these issues and see if we might be able to predict the sort of law that the president might introduce and Congress might be able to pass. But first, let’s read an article about what happened in Newtown before the shootings, when residents tried to pass local laws restricting gun use.

Related | Hunting and recreational gun use has always been popular in Newtown, just as in many small towns in rural America. But when local officials tried to restrict the use of high-powered guns and explosives, they found themselves in a tumultuous political fight. The article “In Town at Ease With Its Firearms, Tightening Gun Rules Was Resisted” shows how the conflict continued even after the Dec. 14 shootings. Here are two opposing points of view included in the article:

“Something needs to be done. These are not normal guns, that people need. These are guns for an arsenal, and you get lunatics like this guy who goes into a school fully armed and protected to take return fire.” — Joel T. Faxon, member of the police commission in Newtown, Conn.

“Guns are why we’re free in this country, and people lose sight of that when tragedies like this happen. A gun didn’t kill all those children, a disturbed man killed all those children.” — Scott Ostrosky, owner of a gun range in Newtown.

Read the entire article with your class, using the questions below to assess students’ understanding.

Questions | For reading comprehension and discussion:

Does most of this article take place before or after the school shootings in Newtown?

Which groups are coming into conflict in this article, and what are they arguing about?

What do the gun enthusiasts want, and what do town leaders want?

What sort of local ordinance (law) is being considered?

From what you can tell, have opinions changed in Newtown since the school shootings?

What does this tell us about the challenges of changing gun laws across America? And does this seem like a typical town?

Video

Newtown Reacts to Obama’s Speech

Residents of Newtown Conn., share their thoughts on President Obama’s address at the vigil for victims of the Sandy Hook massacre.

Activity | In this activity, students will use the questions below to predict what sort of law President Obama and Congress might pass in the coming months to prevent a recurrence of the shootings in Newtown. They will then write a simple legislative bill containing those predicted elements of a new gun control law. They may also choose to write a competing bill introduced by opponents of gun control.

Depending on student age, skill level and availability of computers, teachers may wish to assign this task either to individual students or pairs. Students could also research the topic in small groups before writing individual bills.

To start, each student should read the first two questions from the list below, read the linked articles and write down a list of potential changes to United States gun laws based on recent comments by President Obama and other leaders. They should then read the remaining questions and scan additional articles, looking for additional components of a possible gun control law.

Finally, students will create a bill that contains the following elements, using a format similar to the Princeton Model Congress program:

Preamble of at least one paragraph that provides detailed reasons on why a new law is needed.

Body containing sections and subsections – one for each new requirement, element or change in the law.

Enactment clause explaining when the new law would go into effect.

As a culminating activity, the class may hold a model Congress in which students vote for the bill most likely to be adopted.

Teachers may also assign students to track coverage of the issue in The New York Times, following any real bill introduced on behalf of President Obama through both houses of Congress and voting on which of their classmates came closest to predicting the eventual outcome.

QUESTIONS TO CONSIDER

Photo

The AR-15 style rifle, which can be customized in a number of ways, was used in the mass shootings in Newton, Conn., in December and in Aurora, Colo., in July. Go to related article »Credit Matthew Staver for The New York Times

What about the Second Amendment? Doesn’t it give people the right to keep a handgun for self-defense?
That is what the Supreme Court ruled in 2008, but it also said the right to bear arms “is not unlimited,” might not extend to include particularly dangerous weapons and restricted places like schools, convicted felons or people with mental illnesses. Lower courts have issued conflicting rulings on just how far the right to bear arms extends. Public opinion on the question has evolved over time, but it is far from settled.

Why not focus on keeping guns out of the hands of mentally ill people who commit mass shootings?
It is a common refrain: guns don’t kill, people do. It was raised after the 2007 mass shooting at Virginia Tech, and last month President Obama said mental health professionals should be consulted in creating new gun-control legislation. But research suggests that focusing solely on mental health is unlikely to make a serious dent in gun-related violence.

What has been the reaction in other countries? Is the United States’ situation unique?
Some commentators in China, which has seen knife attacks in schools but bans private gun ownership, have criticized what they see as America’s permissive approach to guns. Germany has established a national gun registry, but experts doubt that such a system could win approval in the United States. And some in highly armed Switzerland, which has far fewer mass shootings, blame culture rather than guns for the disparity.

So is there a correlation between rates of gun ownership and gun violence?
Many observers have found parallels between high rates of gun ownership and violence in both the United States and Latin America compared with relatively gun-free Europe. And some commentators point to statistics showing that the presence of guns makes homes more dangerous. But experts disagree over whether gun control offers a solution in America, with some calling it a “special case.”

Can technology help make guns safer?
There are technologies that can prevent a gun from firing unless it is being held by its owner or disable guns in restricted locations like schools. But they are not currently required, and gun advocates say such features would interfere with their ability to resell guns privately or at gun shows.

Is this a liberal/conservative or Republican/Democratic issue?
Until now, the debate over gun control has largely split on familiar partisan lines. But some liberal observers say the Newtown shootings may offer an opportunity to transcend politics, particularly if advocates avoid hot-button terms like “gun control.”

2007 | Lawyers, Guns and Meaning: Students conduct a close reading of the Second Amendment to the Constitution and engage in a “fish bowl” discussion about how best to interpret the text as well as write a letter to the editor expressing their views.

2004 | Safety Catch: Students consider their own beliefs about gun control after examining the effects of and speculations about a decade-long ban on semiautomatic assault weapons.

Reading
1. Read closely to determine what the text says explicitly and to make logical inferences from it; cite specific textual evidence when writing or speaking to support conclusions drawn from the text.
2. Determine central ideas or themes of a text and analyze their development; summarize the key supporting details and ideas.
8. Delineate and evaluate the argument and specific claims in a text, including the validity of the reasoning as well as the relevance and sufficiency of the evidence.

Writing
1. Write arguments to support claims in an analysis of substantive topics or texts, using valid reasoning and relevant and sufficient evidence.
2. Write informative/explanatory texts to examine and convey complex ideas and information clearly and accurately through the effective selection, organization and analysis of content.
4. Produce clear and coherent writing in which the development, organization and style are appropriate to task, purpose and audience.

Civics
18. Understands the role and importance of law in the American constitutional system and issues regarding the judicial protection of individual rights.
21. Understands the formation and implementation of public policy.

…Force all registered gun owners to purchase insurance per each weapon. In the event the insured firearm is used in a homicide or other related crime; the insurance company would pay the victims. This in essence would force insurance companies to evaluate gun owner and assess their risk based in many factors. Definitely it may work

Just out of curiosity have you noticed the extreme anti gun bias in your proposed lesson plan? No where in your proposed plan do you allow for a student to decide for his or her self that no new laws are required. You force the students into your biases and require them to become proponents of gun control. You consistently refer to those who are not in favor of additional gun control laws as ‘gun enthusiasts.’. Why not refer to them as supporters of the second amendment? Or constitutional law enthusiasts? Why is it your job to promote your political agenda and to teach your political biases in the school system without any options?

Thank you for your comment. However, I would like to emphasize the following: 1) We use the term “gun enthusiast” only once in the lesson plan, not consistently. It is our practice in lesson plans to mirror the language in the original Times article to which we refer. In this case the article distinguishes between “assault weapon enthusiasts” and “traditional hunters and discreet gun owners” who support some limited restrictions on shooting in town. 2) In the activity, the lesson explicitly says students “may also choose to write a competing bill introduced by opponents of gun control.” We very much tried to create a lesson plan that encouraged students to think for themselves about this important issue. – Michael Gonchar, Deputy Editor, The Learning Network

My opinion is that all automatic guns should be use as military,not in civil life for self defending.The new law should ban automatic guns and with help of government need to buy back all of them from the owners.

It is no surprise that the NYTimes would publish this lesson plan. Gun Control is a liberal desire. And NYTimes is a liberal rag. Don’t say that you are trying to show both sides, the warm up itself is indoctrination. It says that because this guys used four of his mothers guns that guns are bad. Nothing is said about the what could be done to help people who need it. The thing is what he did was against the law. We already have legislation that prohibits this activity. So is more legislation going to help the current legislation. I think a proper lesson plan would discuss how to help people in our society that are desperate, instead of taking guns out of the hands of the good people.

It seems obvious that there is a lot of fear of being shot in the United States. There is the fear that the ‘bad’ people will shoot you or your loved ones and for many, this extends to the fear that the ‘good’ people will not have the tools to defend themselves against such threats.

However, this notion of ‘good’ and ‘bad’ is subjective and therefore false. People’s minds are swayed constantly and this affects notions are what is acceptable and unacceptable. When threatened, people act in uncharacteristic ways. This is incredibly dangerous, and I myself certainly wouldn’t want to be presented with a gun as I don’t know who I might end up hurting.

I know this is controversial, but I am from the UK, and I am not scared of being shot or of having to defend myself. I would be scared to actually see a real life gun. I am so unfamiliar with gun-related terminology that I have to look it up when I read articles about shootings in the US. It’s just not part of my own culture.

I believe that these type of shootings will not stop in the US until guns stop becoming part of the rhetoric of everyday life.

Law’s that are being considered to prevent any more horrible incidents like the one in Sandy Hook are being established. I believe that they should enforce laws to restrict gun use, especially automatic guns. With automatic guns restricted people are less likely to go out and shoot people. Some changes that have occurred in New Town since the shooting are that for police have been stationed at schools in the area. All in all i believe that the government should place laws restricting some gun use.

i think it would be a good idea but than again the idea also has its pros and cons. the only con i can think of is the guards would be to thick headed and probably try to over run the school. pros would be more protection/security, safety.

Gun control laws are depicted as kind and traditionally progressive. Many challengers of gun control think self-defense to be a basic and unalienable person right and judge that firearms are an significant apparatus in the work out of this right. There is conflict over the belongings of the gun control laws in Australia, with some researchers coverage important drops in gun-related sin.

“[. . .] We very much tried to create a lesson plan that encouraged students to think for themselves about this important issue.”

I’m not trying diminish or contradict what you’re saying, but I’m concerned about whether this lesson plan provides accurate information about the mechanics of guns, rather than just guns as a political issue. For example, how different types of guns work, and accurate explanations of their nomenclature.

I ask this because ignorance of the workings of these simple machines, and misuse of their nomenclature, have been heavily abused throughout the gun control conversation. For example, the term “semi-automatic” has been misused to make people believe that it’s interchangeable with “fully automatic,” when, in fact, semi-automatic rifles are designed specifically for civilian use. The most prominent example is the term “military style semi-automatic assault rifle,” which is nonsensical, being that there’s not a modern military on the planet that issues a semi-automatic rifle as standard assault gear. In reality, semi-auto tends to be used in more specialized capacity, such as certain sniping rifles, and even there, a bolt-action (single shot per reload) tends to be preferred for accuracy and reliability.

Guns are devices that have not evolved significantly in their fundamental workings for the last century, and explanation of those workings would take maybe an hour of lecture time to thoroughly explain, even to a child. To not cover the factual information on such a hot-button issue would be, in my opinion, extremely irresponsible.

tl;dr – Are there going to be facts taught to these children, or just more indoctrination, be it from one side or the other?